Here's another over an hour interview I did with someone I have never met or talked to before, Mr. Fatal:
Confessions of a Sociopath author interviews sociopath spectrum former army paratrooper infantryman Mr. Fatal. They talk about how well suited psychopaths are for the military, as first responders such as firefighters, police, and other risky occupations, professions such as surgery that require clarity of thought and less emotional and empathic attachment, etc. per Kevin Dutton's book the Wisdom of Psychopaths. They also talk about how a psychopath would respond to military and martial arts training and the role of honor in those disciplines (Mr. Fatal is one of many generations of warriors in his family). They talk about the cycles that psychopaths develop through, including the playground stage in the early 20s and the "reckoning" of the late 20s and early 30s and about the role that sense of self plays. They also talk about the stigma of psychopathy, including hurting animals (Mr. Fatal loves animals more than most humans) and other natural variations or expressions of the personality disorder that you might see amongst the populace.
A reader asked me, "what's with the cruelty?" I responded:
A good question. Have you never felt the urge to destroy? You probably have, but didn't think of it that way. Let's say there is a piece of cake sitting out on a counter -- perfect little piece of cake. What do you feel like doing to that cake? Isn't that destruction?
If it were possible to both have our cake and eat it too, then things might have worked out differently between you and your socio. Because that isn't possible and because your socio chose one way and not the other, you perceive/experience cruelty. But what is the use of a perfect little piece of cake that just sits out there forever on the counter, never to be eaten?
I've long been struck by the idea of childhood diagnosis of sociopaths--of exactly how early and easily we can be spotted. I, myself, was pretty aware of my own differences at an early age. Couldn't describe it back then, but I always saw the difference, that desire to compete fiercely, and even humiliate, break, and if possible, injure the competition in a way that never led back to me, all while playing adults like fiddles. Because of this history, I recently recognized another small sociopath with absolute clarity.
Recently, my wife and I were on vacation visiting friends of ours from grad school. They have a five-year-old boy. It was like looking at a little version of myself. Seeing this kid take joy in first playing with his puppy, and slowly but surely escalating the play and contact to the level of inflicting intentional pain. I recognized on his part that he knew precisely when he was crossing a line--looking up, causing the pain when he thought no adult was looking, and the false regret in his voice but clearly not his eyes when caught. It was like looking back in time into a mirror. He didn't reserve his violence and force for his pet, either, but also targeted both his parents and my wife and I. When his parents tried to use the old parenting canard of "you're hurting mommy and daddy" which usually reduces kids to crying, mewling shame-balls, their son only grinned.
If seeing his joy at this weren't a recognition of my own childhood feelings when I caused physical or emotional pain, the cinch was seeing his uncanny understanding of social dynamics, and the privileged role that most kids occupy in society which saves them from adult wrath. In other words, this child was manipulative beyond his years. Again, something familiar to myself.
By looking at him, you wouldn't think he's growing up in a nurturing, progressive, yuppie household where both parents hold doctorate degrees (or on second thought, maybe you would). His parents were oblivious to their little 'angel' and the intentionality of his aggression. Or at least have developed a practiced obliviousness.
But what surprised me most was how quickly a weekend around a small version of myself stirred up territorial feelings. Those feelings made me think of the practices of male lions direct towards a competitor's cubs. Good thing I live half a country away.
This Gizmodo article describes a recent experiment in which test subjects drove automobiles. The experimenter placed small rubber animals (turtle, snake, and spider) on the side of the road. Six percent of drivers went out of their way to run over the animal.
To the experimenters, this seemed sadistically cruel -- particularly in the case of the turtle and the snake. (Presumably it is understandable that some people would want to run over a tarantula, and when you factored out the people running over the tarantula, the numbers went down to 2.8%.) From the article:
It is still quite a surprisingly high number. At least compared to a 2008 study using the Psychopathy Checklist, which discovered that 1.2 percent of the US population were potential psychopaths. 1.2 vs 2.8 is a huge difference. Now, I'm not going to pull a PETA—I actually hate PETA—and say that the six (or 2.8) percent are all potential psychopaths, but clearly these people have some kind of mental problem. At the very least, their empathy circuits must be pretty broken. Personally, I wouldn't like to be friends with any of them. And I really don't care which kind of animal they ran over because all of them were locatedoutside of the lane and posed absolutely no danger to the drivers. Needless to say, if a turtle or a snake is on the middle of your lane, never risk your life to save it. Your safety must come first, but this was not the case. This was all the contrary. And it's quite disgusting.
Is it really a surprising number? And does it make any sense to suggest that all animal killers are sociopaths and all sociopaths are animal killers? Maybe some of them are just really bad drivers. I probably wouldn't go out of my way to kill the animal. In fact most of the time I go out of my way to avoid the animal. Why? I don't know, getting blood and guts all over the automobile, the possibility of losing control by swerving to hit it, or any other reason. I'm curious why they didn't do follow up interviews with the people asking them why they did or did not run them over. Some of them might lie and said that they didn't realize they did, but I bet you would get honest answers from at least some of the people.
You're right, I feel like there is a lot of emphasis on animal cruelty in the diagnostic criteria for psychopaths, typically juvenile cruelty. Does animal cruelty only appeas to a juvenile psychopath's mind? Or they shift their cruel behavior to humans as they age?
I myself have no affection for animals, certainly no greater affinity for them than I would have for any person. Still I don't go out of my way to hurt or kill them, but I have also never shied away from it when the situation called for it. For instance, I don't have the urge to kill a chicken just to see its blood spill, but no problem killing it to slaughter it for food. I am the type of person that would kill a neighbor's barking dog if I knew there would be no negative repercussions from it.
I saw this on some site: "I know one sociopath who really likes her Preying Mantis and doesn't like dogs. An enjoyment of dogs generally requires some degree of caring, empathy--characteristics devoid in sociopaths." Maybe. I just don't understand the appeal of animals, other than their pure utilitarian value. But I love children and inanimate objects, so I'm not judging or anything.
i've also been thinking, though, in regards to everyone that asks me if they are a sociopath or not. my thought is this, either you believe that sociopaths exist, or you don't, you think that they are self-aware narcissists or have ADD or asperger's or autism or are borderline or manic depressive or schizoid, or not loved as a children, guarded, unemotional, or the myriad of other "disorders" that if you stack them on top of each other in the right combinations could explain everything a sociopath is. but if you believe that 1-4% of the population has a condition called
"sociopathy," then ask yourself -- in a room full of 100 people, am i the most coldhearted, remorseless bastard in that room? if the answer is yes, than that is probably a good indication that you are a sociopath. if no, or if maybe, then you probably aren't, or your aren't enough to really be concerned about it. and as many have said before, labels do not have any intrinsic value, just the value from being able to explore the truth about yourself and others.
A friend sent me a link to this Huffington Post article suggesting that the practice of frying a fish and eating it while still alive may be "shocking" and "too graphic for some readers." I guess the Chinese are just a cruel race of sociopaths, because the people in the video seemed to enjoy it immensely.
Comments are unmoderated. Blog owner is not responsible for third party content. By leaving comments on the blog, commenters give license to the blog owner to reprint attributed comments in any form.
